Furbearer Management and Trapping – New Mexico
Position Paper
Trapping is part of New Mexico’s cultural heritage that began long before the first Spanish settlers arrived hundreds
of years ago. For thousands of years, Native Americans have used trapping as a means to harvest game and their furs
for subsistence, trading, selling, and use in ceremonial rituals. In modern times, Native Americans continue to use
furs and regulated trapping of furbearers by other citizens provides income, recreation, and an outdoor lifestyle
through sustainable use of a renewable natural resource. With over 1,500 licenses sold annually in New Mexico
between 2011 and 2014 and generation of about $3 million annually in the state, trapping provides a vital
supplement to incomes and to the self-sufficiency of people who make their livings off the land. Trapping also plays
an integral role in state regulated furbearer management and wildlife research, and is the primary tool for use in the
national multi-billion dollar wildlife damage control industry.
Regulated trapping provides a necessary tool for biologists to collect information about wildlife densities,
presence/absence, genetics, and to detect zoonotic wildlife diseases such as rabies, anthrax, tularemia, and influenza.
Imperiled species such as black-footed ferrets, least terns, sea turtles, whooping cranes, and others benefit from
regulated trapping of predators such as skunks, raccoons, foxes, and coyotes, and exotics such as nutria and feral
hogs. Despite the scientific and societal values of trapping, however, portions of the public vehemently oppose it.
Anti-trapping legislation has been introduced across the country for several decades, including New Mexico in 2013
and 2015. Such legislation threatens to undermine state wildlife management authority and to remove a very
effective wildlife management tool from the landscape.
The vehement opposition to trapping as witnessed during legislative sessions is largely associated with urban and
suburban population centers. Many of those in opposition are a generation or more removed from the land and do
not connect with the largely agrarian lifestyles of those who approve of, practice, or benefit from regulate d trapping.
Today, opposition centers largely on the emotionally driven anthropomorphic animal rights movement and the
associated fundamental lack of acceptance of conservation principles (versus preservation) and sustainable use of
renewable resources. The foundational differences in lifestyles and values between those who support regulated
trapping as an acceptable and necessary wildlife management tool and those who believe all animals have rights
akin to human beings cause untenable conflict and an insurmountable barricade to any meaningful negotiation or
compromise. The ensuing fights at the legislative level are usually winner take all propositions with little regard to
science-based management and sustainable take of furbearing animals.
Furbearer management and human/wildlife conflict, especially in urban and suburban settings, are inextricably
linked. In dealing with furbearers in urban/suburban areas, state wildlife agencies often use an adaptive management
approach involving education, deterrents, and lethal techniques to address specific problems, while attempting to
foster public tolerance for offending wildlife. For decades, state wildlife managers have relied on the free services
provided by licensed trappers to assist landowners in controlling damage caused by furbearers. Traditional furbearer
trapping, however, has become an increasingly rural activity that has been displaced by ‘nuisance wildlife control’
operators and the associated multi-billion dollar animal damage control industry in and around cities. The nuisance
wildlife control industry is loosely regulated by most state wildlife agencies and is often seen by urban citizens as a
‘humane’ alternative to trapping as many of the animals are caught in cage-type traps and taken elsewhere. Those
animals are then usually killed out of sight of the landowner or worse, released to become a nuisance again or to
negatively impact adjacent wildlife populations that are already at or near biological or social carrying capacity.
Unlike those trapped for the fur trade, animals killed by nuisance wildlife control operators are usually discarded
without any use of the fur or carcass.
While human dependence on furbearers for survival has decreased in modern times, people around the world
continue to harvest furbearers for sustenance, economic livelihood, and personal recreation. The taking and trading
of furbearer pelts is an economic driver of governments throughout the world resulting in significant trade
negotiations between the United States, Canada, the European Union, Russia and China. As such, regulated trapping
as practiced in the United States and entrusted to state wildlife resource agencies adheres to all internationally
accepted principles of natural resource conservation. Those principles stipulate that resource management activities
must maintain essential ecological processes, preserve genetic diversity, and ensure continued existence of species
and ecosystems. Furbearer management through state-regulated trapping is consistent with those principles and is a
necessary and ecologically sound method of harvesting and managing the resource.
The position of the Linebery Policy Center for Natural Resource Management regarding furbearer management and
trapping is:
I.
Trapping is one of the most highly regulated methods of wildlife harvest by state wildlife agencies.
Resultant harvest data support that such regulations adequately protect furbearer populations from
overharvest and protect regulated species from harvest during biologically sensitive times of the year.
II.
Regulated trapping is a necessary and integral tool for state wildlife management agencies to maintain
healthy and robust furbearer populations while providing sustainable opportunities for take of the resource
and decreasing the potential for human-wildlife conflict and spread of diseases.
III.
Trapping has been documented to protect declining, rare, threatened, or endangered species by targeting
predators that negatively affect local populations and recovery efforts.
IV.
Regulated trapping is a necessary and effective tool to protect private property and humans from damage
caused by wildlife, including furbearers, other predators (e.g., mountain lions, wolves, bears), and rodents.
V.
Regulated trapping methods should utilize individual species’ Best Management Practices (BMPs) as
developed by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) and partnering state agencies (see
http://www.fishwildlife.org/files/Introduction_BMPs.pdf ). BMPs for each species were developed through
scientifically rigorous performance evaluation of several trap types and manufacturers, with each trap being
evaluated on efficiency, safety, practicality, selectivity, and animal welfare. Further development,
refinement, and implementation of BMPs should be a priority of state wildlife agencies and AFWA.
VI.
We promote the implementation of trapper education programs that reference AFWA BMPs, and teach
proper trap selection and use, proper fur handling, and furbearer management.